World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the Guardian says president Macron's party along with its small ally MoDem could win as many as three fourths of the 577 seats in parliament in the June 2017 election, or about 400-445 seats. The election showed a low turnout of 49%, with abstention highest among supporters of Marie Le Pen of the National Front on the extreme right and Le Melenchon on the extreme left.  A big loser is the Socialist Party which this report estimates losing about 200 seats. Les Republicains the other main party on the right is also a loser, as this report estimates it going from 199 seats to 70-130 seats. The National Front of Marie Le Pen could end up with one seat at worst or just below the threshold of 15 seats from 118 constituencies contested. This is because it faces competition from the right and the left parties for votes in every constitutency, and is kept out by the centre right and centre left coming together. Le Melenchon's France Unbowed is expected to win about 11-23 seats.  In this election young and working class voters stayed away, voters who supported the more extreme left and right wing parties. Chancellor Merkel called it "a vote for reforms." The big majority makes it possible for Macron to get laws to change the labor market to create more jobs, and to make changes to pension and unemployment benefits, so that France's economy can get moving again.  ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This NYT report on Mohamed Bin Zayed of the United Arab Emirates, who comes from Abu Dhabi one of the 7 emirates in the Gulf Coastal region, is rare and unusual. It provides stories the prince loves to tell that make a point about how he sees the world. Here he tells them to Robert F. Worth, in the only interview Mohamed bin Zayad has ever given to a journalist from US or Europe. It took a year just to get the interview. The title about a Dark Vision is inappropriate as Mohamed Zayad simply reflects what is a British way of looking at things- valuing the Constitution, keeping religion private even its deeply held beliefs and cultural traditions such as Bedouin's practice, and a general tolerance that characterizes British society and similar societies throughout the history of Europe and Asia that were sitting on shipping lanes and practiced trade for a livelihood. It is also important because the other Mohamed, Mohamed Bin Salman of Saudi Arabia is seen as someone influenced by the ideas of Mohamed Bin Zayad of Abu Dhabi. President Biden plans a trip to the region in coming months to continue on building a narrative of development for the region. This provide an insight into the coastal regions that include Gujarat across the Gulf in India, that for centuries traded with the Gulf kingdoms. They have a trading mentality and with it comes a tolerance that is also seen in trading nations such as England. This is what brought Britain to India (and China) says Mohandas Gandhi. Gandhi went so far as to say that if there was trade on the moon you would find a British shopkeeper was first to setup shop there. Zayed has as a minister in his cabinet, a woman who is minister of Tolerance, Sheikha Lubna al Quasimi.  Zayed is unique for three reasons. He has embedded in his views the spirit of tolerance. As Worth puts it in NYT, Zayed has grasped what is true to the spirit of the Gulf region. The country's location on an ancient shipping lane has bred a type of Islam in the Gulf region, that is open to the world and tolerant.  His father Zayed Nahyan's  tendencies to openness and frank demeanor combine with this tolerance to provide a different kind of leadership. His father had the pluralist instincts that combined traditional Bedouin attitudes with a rare liberal mindedness. He died at age 86 in 2004. Zayed bin Nahyan MBZ's father was selected for these very reasons by the British in 1966 to rule the small Gulf kingdom of Abu Dhabi. In 1966, says this NYT report, the country was mostly illiterate, half of all children died during childbirth and one third of the women during childbirth, there was a complete lack of western medicine. Zayed Nahyan's brother was averse to development making the British select Zayed Nahyan at the request of Abu Dhabhi families. These early years shaped Mohamed Bin Zayed's views of how to see the world. Zayed the son loves to tell stories, and this one in the NYT shows how Mohamed bin Zayed the son and Mohamed bin Nahyan the father share a sense of what it means to be human and support all people's aspirations for a better life. This is the narrative in India and the region of 1.8 billion people that extends from India to Indonesia and Vietnam. This was seen at the G7 when leaders of India and Indonesia were invited to meet with the G7 in Munich, Germany and taken as utterly serious participants in the discussions to shape the Free World. To see the difference- UAE has signed agreements to increase trade with India to $100 billion over 5 years and was thanked by prime minister Modi for treatment of 8 million Indian workers in the Gulf region during the pandemic. Saudis are now stabilizing the Turkish and Egyptian economies with aid and providing some of the funding assistance for Siemens to modernize the entire Egyptian rail system with the latest technology over the next 5 years. Projects of this size that have never been undertaken since 1945. Sometime in the 1980's when Zayed was a young military officer having completed training at the Royal British Military Academy at Sandhurst, England, and educated in Scotland, he went to the grasslands of Tanzania. During his visit to Tanzania he went to several villages to see the Masai tribes. When he returned he sat with his father crosslegged on the floor in traditional Bedouin and Asian style and told him about his travels. His father asked Zayed about all the details- the wildlife, the Masai people and their customs, the extent of poverty in the country. After hearing it all his father asked Zayed what he had done for the people he had encountered. In response Zayed shrugged and answered, the people he met were not Muslims. Zayed still recalls his father's reaction, sudden, forceful and indelible from memory. Zayad says his father took a sudden hold of his arm and spoke to him in a harsh tone and stern demeanor- " We are all God's children."     ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Polish and other Eastern European immigrants to Ireland return home from the Ireland aand the UK as the economies of the 2 countries and unemployment deteriorate and improved job prospects draw the immigrants back home. In fact share of immigrants in ireland reached a high of 155 as Ireland averaged economic growth rates of 5% for many years. Nearly half a million received the irish version ofa social security number. Polish immigrants were the highest almost two thirds followed by Lithuanians and Slovakians. Hourly wages for Eastern European immigrants are 45% less than for Irish people with the same education and experience. Now Ireland's growth has dropped to 1.2% for the last quarter. The reversal is also of the similiar magnitude. A citigroup econ9omist in Warsaw estimates that half of Polish immigrants to Western Europe will return home in the next 2 years. In the UK half of an estimated one million Eastern European immigrants have already left says London Institute for Public Policy Research in an April report. As the immigrants return the currency dynamics also help the pound has lost 40% of its value against the zloty, Poland's currency, and this makes the UK less atttractive to immigrants. Overall the EU immigration opening has helped both sides, as it has helped stabilize the Polish economy and the UK has gained from the immigrants services as it moderated wage inflation and increased domestic demand and met the demands of the economy as it was growing. Now there is a fear that too rapid an exit of immigrants would hurt demand in these economies and also overwhelm labor markets in Poland. Another noteworthy feature of this immigration wave was the low cost of airlinne tickets which has helped travel across europe and also helped European integration. One immigrant a polish mechanic says that he felt more like a commuter than a migrant, as it conly cost $150 a round trip. How are things in Poland today as they return. Very very different. EU entry has really helped Poland through foreign investment and aid from Brussels to assist the country in its catching up progress. Average monthly wages have gone up 30% with construction wages up 50%. and inflation a low of 4.4%. The difference is striking in the medieval city of Krakow in the southeast that has emerged as an information technology and outsourcing hub. where a steady stream of returning workers is helping companies hire workers to meet the new growth. German commercial truck maker MAN has finished recruting 250 mechanics for a new plant in Krakow with 40% of applications from returnig workers. And those who are returning bring fluent English skills and expertise gathered during their stay overseas, and new attitudes to work. This happened to Ireland as Irish workers returned home in the early years of its boom, they hared skills and attitudes learned abroad, according to an economist at Dublin's Economic and Social Research Institute who sees the same thing happening in Poland....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Pearlstein argues that the US and the Obama administration achieved most of its goals, even though the Europeans took the credit. On regulatory reform, Geithner's regulatory reform proposal he says, could well have been written at the French Finance Ministry, as at the US Treasury. And it gives Obama ammunition to prepare, as private equity, hedge funds, and banks try to water down his proposals for regulatory reform. By having member countries commit to adding $850 billion to the resources at the IMF, and regional development banks to provide help to countries in serious difficulties- and giving instructions that the money can be used not only for debt rollover, bank recapitalization and balance of payments support, but also for stimulus spending, infrastructure investment, trade finance and social support- the Obama adminstration has accomplished a great deal. It has succeeded in putting in place the necessary financial resources to support not only the financial systems of countries in Eastern Europe, Asia and Latin America that need help, but put emphasis on the need for resources to go for helping reduce job losses, create jobs, and provide some forms of income or support to people in these countries. This is a major step as it means the countries of Eastern Europe and other developing countries can deal with their crises in confidence. Mexico is taking loans from the IMF. Dominique Strauss Kahn had begun the policy of shifting IMF's focus to these social goals as significant parts of the recovery process in countries, but he faced the old mindset among the IMF staff, as when its reported staff wanted to increase interest rates in Pakistan by 10% instead of the 3% that was finally agreed to. That would have caused serious difficulty to the people of Pakistan, created chaotic situation and disturbed the social fabric of that country. See the link to this for S. Korea and for Pakistan. And as Gordon Brown put it the old conditionality that lay behind the IMF loans, is phased out. This makes it the new policy at the IMF backed by the G20 mandate. The Washington consensus which prescribed open borders, floating exchange rates and fiscal prudence is now ended. And to support this change the developing countries will have a bigger say in IMF policy and decisions. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Trade deficit and imports of auto parts into the US for Japanese factories in the US. How the weaker dollar is helping the trade deficit with incentives to increase manufacturing of cars in the US for German automakers. (see related article)The reverse is the case for Japan. The weaker yen make manufacturing in the US less advantageous. But Toyota has expanded manufacturing in the US to meet demand and is only now slowing the manufacturing expansion in the US (see related article).
Hindustan Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The full text of the letter is given here. In this letter the U.S. sets out some important facts about events that happened during the coronavirus crisis during the crucial 4 month period from December 2019 to March 2020. Every week lost in this time due to reasons of a lack of transparency, openness meant hundreds of thousands of people more infected and tens of thousands of deaths worldwide. There are questions of transparency, of openness and this raises questions about the manner in which the World Health Assembly operates with hundreds of small countries in Africa and Asia having votes equal to that of the U.S., India, Brazil, Mexico with votes taken of over 200 countries. The entire election process can now be seen as questionable, when over a billion people in one country alone such as India or hundreds of millions in Brazil and Mexico would have to bear the consequences of poor decisions made by small countries that can be swayed in one direction or another based on political bias and other considerations that have nothing to do with global health.  At the conclusion of the letter by the U.S. to the current WHO shaped by a controversial election in 2017 the following is stated about the standards set by Gro Harlem Brundtland and which helped the world prevent the SARS crisis which originated in China in 2003 from spreading to the large countries of the world India, Brazil, Mexico, and other such countries in Asia and Africa, Latin America, and the U.S. European Union. "In 2003, in response to the outbreak of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in China, Director-General Harlem Brundtland boldly declared the World Health Organization’s first emergency travel advisory in 55 years, recommending against travel to and from the disease epicenter in southern China. She also did not hesitate to criticize China for endangering global health by attempting to cover up the outbreak through its usual playbook of arresting whistleblowers and censoring media. Many lives could have been saved had you followed Dr. Brundtland’s example." Even this does not come to grips with the flawed way in which the election of WHO head is done. It can no longer be relied on when there is the danger that lack of transparency can emerge in the WHO leadership itself because of a flawed process. It risks endangering the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions in countries such as India, Brazil, Mexico, as well as in the relatively small countries of Africa and Latin America where even basic water supplies are at risk but which could tilt elections at the World Health Assembly. Consider that a cyclone just hit the Indian state of West Bengal and Bangladesh on May 20 just as the coronavirus pandemic is spreading. That this region of 1.5 billion people had just 2 votes out of over 200 cast at the World Health Assembly in 2017 shocking. And even these votes cast based on old geopolitical considerations not how good the candidate is, and how good the country he is coming from is in terms of its record  on public health. The irony here is that private foundations in the advanced countries in the U.S. and Europe some of whom are major donors to WHO did not think that more experienced candidates in their own countries with a better record of public health such as in France or Germany are better qualified, in a flawed NGO support mentality left from the Clinton years. Basically the people in these large countries such as India, Brazil, Mexico were disenfranchised, when the austerity policies were consuming the European Union, and the U.S. had just elected a new administration itself groping for ways to reverse years of neglect of public services and infrastructure priorities. They would trust good leaders no matter where they come from, who have a record of transparency, leadership, and all the values we cherish together no matter where we come from. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The new faces in the Biden administration on economic policy are Janet Yellen, as head of the central bank, the Federal Reserve, and Cecilia Rouse, a Princeton labor economist, as head of the Council of Economic Advisors. In this report WSJ looks at the economic policies of the new administration after Mr. Trump rejected globalization and international trade agreements that were not in America's interest or that hurt American workers.  Informal conversations with experts suggest WSJ says, that globalization is now suspect as a way that benefitted China and other countries including Germany, and hurt the U.S. France, Britain and other countries in Europe that were not strong exporters. This hurt their industries which were eroded by imports resulting in the three decades long destruction of communities across these countries that depended on manufacturing. It has also hurt countries like India that let their markets be dominated by Chinese imports, with a reversal of policy in 2020 with self reliant economy under "Atman Nirbhar" policy as the new goal. Mr. Trump's tactic in this trade war was to fight back to regain America's position in manufacturing with tariffs on imports. The trade deficit had to come down with China just as it had done with Japan decades earlier. This was starting to happen. One problem in bringing down the imports was the increase in the value of the dollar, as Janet Yellen has noted. The new policies will look at what the effective policy will be while keeping this goal in mind.  Both Yellen and Ms. Rouse have spent years studying labor markets and Ms. Rouse is quoted here as saying: " With open trade there are winners and losers. The losers are really losing, and we need to take care of them and take on more nuanced models of international trade as a result." Other experts from the earlier Democratic administrations such as Prof. Frankel at Harvard say that there needs to be increased focus on American workers left behind by trade, technology and unequal education, with more spending on preschool, infrastructure and health. All this suggests that there will be a continuation of U.S. policy in challenging Chinese use of globalization to advance its interests, chastening Americans on the use of the very word globalization which can mean different things to different people based on how they can gain advantage. The word may even be entirely dropped in favor of what the policies are and what they do for the American worker, American communities including small towns, and the American people, spelling each of these out every time supply chains and the global economy is mentioned. The new administration will get an opportunity to show that it too can come up with new ideas and action plan to strengthen American manufacturing and jobs. It will also have to show substantial results as people have lost patience with Democrats and Republicans on the lack of progress in rebuilding America's leadership role in the world economy, and in defending American workers and factories. Clinton, Obama and Bush all offered false promises on trade with China ignoring the damage this had done to American leadership in the world economy. Clinton with support for China's entry into the World Trade Organization, Bush with foreign wars and costly diversions and regulatory failures with banks that led to the 2009 deep recession hurting Americans, and Obama with the lack of will and interest in America's leadership role in the world as the dominant nation in manufacturing,   ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Collapse of the easten european economies says the Economist would raise questions about the idea of a united Europe, the idea of the EU itself, and destabilize the euro - as countries in the EU like Ireland and Greece are in just as bad a shape. And in talk of enlargement of the EU will be doomed, and this is true of the western Balkans, TUrkey, and some countries int he former Soviet Union. Politically letting these countries derift could mean they fall for populists and nationalists of the bad type. And there is the serious economic consideration for banks in Austria, Italy and Sweden, which are heavily involved in lending to Eastern Europe. They could see catastrophic losses and put the banking systems of these countries at risk. Sweden has already chosen to help the Baltic Countries, and sees it has its political responsibility, and the whole Baltic region as its home, see link. The Economist suggests a differentiated approach depending on which group of countries in Eastern and Central Europe something that Angela Merkel of Germany also supports. For Ukraine the Economist says its best to let the IMF provide assistance. For the Baltic countries, plus Bulgaria, the Economist advocates an accelerated path to the euro, on the grounds that they are tiny and shouln't affect confidence in the euro. The Baltic countries have a population of 7 million. This approach is not supported by the European Commission or the European Central Bank. For the 4 larger countries, Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, and Romania, the Economist says the priority should be to prevent further currency collapse, and to rescue the banks responsible for the foreign currency loans that are going bad, with the pain being shared between debtors and the banks, governments of lending and borrowing countries. Financial institutions like the ECB, the IMF, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Developemnt, and the European Investment Bank should help support the rescue effort. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Irish voters rejected the Lisbon treaty 53% to 47%. Ireland joined the EU in 1973 and has gone during this period from the poorest country in the bloc to the second richest in per capita terms after Luxembourg. As the first attemp to get approval of an EU constitution for a closer political union was rejected by French and Dutch voters in 2005, the effort was modified to take out the EU flag and call it a treaty and not a constitution and to go the route of approval by parliaments in each country instead of elections. But Ireland's constitution required a referendum and now Ireland has rejected the treaty. The Irish generally have favored the EU so it will give more thought to those who favor closer political union about how to proceed from here. Opposition to it in Ireland was based on a fear that Irish taxes would have to be raised and make Ireland less attractive for investors, and fear that the EU's global free trade stance meant that cheap food imports would be forced on Ireland and hurt Irish agriculture, but the Lisbon treaty has little to do with taxes and farming. The Lisbon treaty calls for a EU President that is appointed and ceate a Foreign Minister who can speak for the EU and greater powers to legislate in areas like immigration. How will EU supporters proceed from here? One is to go for ratification by the Parliaments of the 26 other countries in the EU without risking a vote. Another is to work on a two speed Europe with core countries like Germany and France and Spain and Portugal and Italy forming a political union and countries like the UK and Netherlands taking a more trade and economic based union approach. Also subject of discussion will be how to get the message of European union across, what is it about, and what are the institutions for, according to one expert at Oxford University....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Important year end reveiw of the oil price forecasting work of so many anlaysts and where they failed . The IEA and the US Enery Dpt forecast have year after year underestimated this pirce by over 20%. Analysts change the price forecasts within a couple of weeks based on changing information and assumptions. Of all this the Saudi Arabian forecasts have ben within 12 % of what has actually ocurred according to a study by Ronald Berger Strategy Consultants of Muich, Germany. And whats their forecast for 2008. By extrapolating from the Saudi budget and the assumptions, used such as giving a wide margin to avoid a deficit in the budget if oil prices undershot by a wide margin, one gets $75 for US benchmark crude. Forecast by experts are in the neighborhood of $80 average for the whole year 2008. Goldman recently revised theirs upwards from $85 average for 2008 to $95 within a 4 week period. How good is the Goldman forecast. No one really knows. Lehman has a forecast of $84 average for 2008 and bases it on the opacity of the market because no one knows what OPEC will do with supply and China does not provide good information on demand. So basically anlysts are adding an uncertainty premium to the price of oil. And this is especially so because as the Chief Economist at IEA says global space capacity is so thin and any event can influence price. Last year the rhetoric about Irans nuclear intentions was enough to stir up the price, as were other smaller events disrupting supplies. But the Iranian situation has since cooled down and diplomatic solutions are in the works. So what to expect in 2008 in the way of political uncertainty. Iraq, Iran, Palestine, Lebanon have all seen a cool off in the ast couple of years and the Bush administration rhetoric has become outmoded as has other rhetoric from Iran so that does'nt look like it will stir up oil prices in 2008. Still there will be some uncertainty premium about supply from OPEC and demand from China and India. And demand from the Middle Eastern oil producing countries themselves as well as the increasing demand in India and China will mean that lower demand in the US because of a recession will still mean an increase in global demand over 2007 of 1.5 million barrrels a day over 2007's 85 million barrels a day. What will change the dynamics of this situation is the government mandated fuel economy for all vehicles on the road with Europe more aggressive in this area under the pressures of global warming. If this impacts India, China and Russia as these fuel saving technologies are transferrred there overall consumption should see an impact. Europe's targets are only 4 years away for 2012. And the environment may cause China to bring in newer technologies that both contribute to improving environment and conserving energy. Because China's environmental record is almost catastrophic one could see some of this happen much sooner than expected after the Olympics in 2008. All that might change the way the world looks at oil and its use, and all energy sources and their use. ...
FRANCE 24 Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The astounding fact in this French FR24 report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and country carbon emissions show that China's emissions accelerated to rise 3 fold in 2015 to about 12 billion tons of carbon emissions from about 4 billion in 2000. US remains at about 6 billion. India is at about 3 billon tons of carbon emissions, about where China was in 2000 when it had about 4 billion tons of carbon emissions. This is shown in the graph on carbon emissions from FR24. The US, European Union graph curves on tons of carbon emissions since 2000 are all flat or declining, India rising slowly from a small base, China's curve is rising straight up from a large enough base at an unbelievable and dangerous rate. What has happened and is it getting worse? China's economy expanded too quickly as globalization was accelerated by banks, and business in the US and Europe, and by the Chinese governments at the local level and the state level. This had negative consequences for US, Europe and China. The too fast growth in China at rates of 10-15% based solely on False GDP indicators that did not take into account damage to the environment and workers was that it hurt manufacturing and working class in US and Europe and contaminated the environment. This was not like growth of Japan in 1960-1980, a smaller country in the way it affected the US and European working classes. Hyper Growth at 10-15% of a large country with 1 billion people compressed over a short period, is cited by Greg Ip in the WSJ as the cause of the negative impact on America.  It hurt China through pollution of rivers and land at an accelerated pace. It hurt China as trade with US and Europe became unsustainable with the loss of manufacturing in the US and Europe leading to a trade war. From these graphs of emissions it now appears that the 3 fold rise in carbon emissions from about 4 billion tons in 2000 to about 12 billion tons in 2015 is the result of unregulated business activity of all those who preferred to push hyper growth in China purely for reasons of profit such as investment banks and corporations in US, Europe, and state or local companies in China.  This has also aggravated inequality in US, Europe and China, and hurt rural populations. Xi Jinping is attempting to correct this in China, Biden is trying to correct this in the US, and Scholz will now attempt to correct this in Germany and the European Union. It is also to be noted that China in 2000-2015 did not have the benefit of the newer technologies that India now has access to, which is why India says it is able to reduce carbon emissions per each unit of GDP by 35% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is this efficiency in producing units of GDP with newer and newer technologies that China lacked in its period of hyper growth 2000-2015 that now looks to have hurt China- with overflow of highly polluting steel mills and other factories which it would prudently and wisely have cut back on. Looking back at this period one sees the wholesale transfer of highly polluting plants in Germany being sold and put up in China, a poor developing country in 2000. Was this a good decision for Germany or for China? In this way the banks and large corporations in the US and Europe who use economic indicators that are limited such as dollar profits, without overall indicators that include negative effect damage to the environment that requires huge investments to correct, problems of trade wars leading to political conflicts, are acting like a person walking blindly in one direction.  With some foresight China and all its trading partners would have done better with slower but more careful Chinese growth of 7-8% that would have better met societal goals in US, Europe and China, avoiding high carbon emissions segments of industries from Day 1. Jinping is doing this in China, and Biden is doing this in the US- cutting out highly polluting factories and segments of industries- but in a climate of mutual distrust, which could have benefitted the world when conducted in a climate of cooperation and trust. The pandemic made the situation even more difficult. Power shortages in factories and blackouts in Chinese cities have led to a reversal of policies on use of coal in China months before the COP26 Glasgow conference and G-20 summit leaving a huge gap. Without the presence of Xi Jinping at COP26 in Glasgow and with Chinese participation uncertain significant progress on climate change is elusive. Estimates by US Renewable Energy Agency is that it would cost $131 trillion to pay for limiting emissions to global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Some major share of this cost can be attributed to the increase from about 4 billion tons in 2000 of carbon emissions in China to about 12 billion tons in 2015, increase by 3 times. One can clearly see from this sudden jump in carbon emissions in China that policies of hyper growth with unregulated polluting industries adding to GDP growth figures was bad policy for China, bad policy for US, and Europe, even if it offered temporary profits for individual companies. India has the advantage of learning from this experience and charting its own wiser course as a partner with US, Europe and Japan and by Modi's vigorous efforts in renewable energy. The lesson- look at all indicators of progress, including climate and society, not just economic indicators in profit or dollar terms, take the tough decisions early in regulating polluting companies and industry segments, and bring full and active public participation with transparent access to data on climate damaging activity in real time because climate and the environment we live in free of polluting substances belongs to all the people, belongs to all life on the planet from trees to animals and birds, not companies that can choose to ignore it. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Much of what is written here about Xi Jinping pursuing Chinese socialist vision was known since he became president in 2013 when China's Communist party was losing its appeal, and efforts were made to seize power within the communist party by a leader in the western province of Chongqing. Bo Xi Lai attempted to take advantage of the situation with appeals to the working class and without any genuine commitment beyond a power grab. It was well known that Xi Jinping is a son of one of the veterans of the Communist party under Mao, Xi Zhongxun, unlike leaders who followed premier Deng Xiaoping such as Jiang Zemin. Zemin was a relatively unknown figure who was in university during the crucial period of 1947-49 when Mao came to power in mainland China. It would not be correct to say that little was known about Xi's own ideas about socialism as the long term answer to China's problems. Xi also came in as president at a time when the Communist party was losing its appeal to working class people after three administrations that followed premier Den Xiaoping. These three administrations followed a form of state capitalism that allowed companies to pollute the environment, compete without any regulations, and allowed to operate without any controls as long as they pursued growth aggressively and expanded the economy.There was an effort by Communist party regional leader in western Chinese province of Chongqing, Bo Xi Lai, to use this as an opportunity to grab power in China. During his first year as president Xi had to resolve this issue by having a court trial after revelations of corruption and misuse of power by Bo Xi Lai.  Xi's father Zhongxun's role in the revolutionary movement offers clues to Xi's own convictions and faith in the party. Zhongxun was a communist soldier who set up the revolutionary base areas in Shanxi-Gansu northwest border region of China that provided a refuge for Mao's army following the Long March. Other clues come from Zhongxun's role as head of propaganda during the period after 1944 and in 1952. Xi's family background particularly on his mother's side shows a fervent commitment to Chinese socialist vision during the chaotic years when the Japanese invaded China and Chiang Kai-Shek's nationalist forces failed to defend China's sovereignty. One reason Xi has been less understood is that little attention is paid to Xi's mother, Qi Xin who was highly educated and fervently believed in Chinese socialism and nationalist spirit during the Japanese invasion in 1938. In fact Qi Xin had to leave middle school after the Japanese took over Beijing. She joined the Counter Japanese Political and Military University to continue education and in 1941 attended the Central Party school. She met Xi's father Zhongxun in 1944. In 1953 she enrolled in the Marx School of Communism, and it was her position at the school that offered her husband added protection during the Cultural Revolution that affected Deng Xiaoping and others. With such a history in the 1930's, 1940's, and 1950's it is likely that Xi was profoundly influenced by his father's role in the revolutionary movement, and his mother's faith in socialism with national spirit as the way to protect against the foreign invasions. It would now appear that by the time Xi joined the Politburo in 2003 there was no question about the future course China would take given the role of his parents, and the events of 1938 the fall of Beijing, his mother having to flee, and the events that followed. Xi showed resilience during the period of the Great Proletarian Revolution when he was sent to the villages at a time when he would be studying in school and college. He was sent to an agricultural commune in largely rural Shanxi province where he worked as a manual laborer alongside other people and developed a relationship with the local farmers. Unlike other leaders during that period which could even be said about premier Deng Xiaoping in 1989, Xi took a different lesson from this experience largely because his father and mother were committed to the socialist vision for the long run. His father was still not fully rehabilitated by premier Chou en-lai when Xi was allowed to enter Beijing's Tsinghua University in 1975. He studied chemical engineering at Tsinghua graduating in 1979. Upon graduation he worked as a assistant for 3 years to a vice premier who was minister of defense. He then left Beijing for Hebei province to work as a deputy secretary of the provincial CCP. He was made Mayor of Xiamen, then governor of Fujian province in 1999 where he tackled environmental conservation before moving to Zheziang province. His father passed away in 2002 and it would appear that he was carefully trained in different provinces instead of staying in Beijing, for a position of national leadership. Xi got his break in 2007 when the upper leadership of Shanghai city was tainted in a wide ranging pension fund scheme. He was made party secretary for Shanghai. This was the position Jiang Zemin had held before he succeeded premier Deng Xiaoping. In only a few months in October 2007 Xi was made one of the 8 Politburo members, ready to succeed Hu Jintao as president. Xi's perception of being sent to the villages and making it to university education was that it was part of the long run socialist struggle, with pain that his father had also endured as simply a phase in which things would be right in the end. Xi's mother comes across as a resilient figure and one who had herself gone through the struggles of the 1930's and aided her husband on one occasion. Some of this resilience could have been passed on to the son. Xi's wife is a zealous participant in Chinese dance and music performances that created enthusiasm for the Chinese socialist revolution from the 1930's period. In his conversations  with colleagues in the party, in culture and temperament, Xi has been forthright about this background and his style of work.  Xi is unlike premier Deng and the presidents who succeeded him such as Hu Jintao mentored by a former mayor of Shanghai Jiang Zemin who came to power in 1989. Xi is more in line with the leaders around Mao like his father in his outlook and thinking, with a cautious temperament that comes from years going through ups and downs of political struggles. He is once said to have responded with dismay about being in a top position in the government knowing how precarious this had been for his father. The education at Tsinghua, his engineering background, and his easy familiarity with farmers in the provinces, mean that he understands China and its history well enough to have the confidence to shape Chinese policies in a way that none of his predecessors had except Mao, premier Chou-en-lai, Liu Shao Chi and a few veterans from that time in the 1930's. That Xi waited patiently for so long to gradually assert his ideas about socialist vision for China may be the surprising part of his behaviour till 2021.  It may be that he wanted to make the changes only after he could persuade party leaders and colleagues of his vision and long run goals. And because the Chinese economy had grown so large that it would take time to steer the ship in a different direction for the long term. In most of the negotiations with president Trump he cautiously let trade negotiators handle the situation, all the time learning about how to tackle problems of China's relationship with US and Europe. US president Biden also has a vision that is veering towards a socialist perspective in terms of bringing gains of progress to workers and families. So does Mr. Trump, Mr. Boris Johnson in UK, and Social Democrat's Scholz in Germany. It is both economic and political as Mr. Xi is quoted as saying in this WSJ report. The necessities of such action are both economic, social and politically driven as capitalism has veered way off course.  In this report it is mentioned that Soho China 40% stake was taken by a large capital markets firm in New York in the hope of large gains, as Soho China developer was a tycoon who wanted to leave China. Seeing it as not favorable to his company following events in Hong Kong. This behaviour of capital markets groups in New York and tech companies in Silicon Valley, driven by profits and not aware of the social and economic problems of working class American families is a problem in the US and in Europe. It is also what has driven so many large tech companies to expand manufacturing operations in China, that hurt US manufacturing capabilities and American workers jobs- an issue raised by president Trump and taken up by president Biden. Biden has already moved to make Intel Corporation change its plans and invest in American manufacturing technologies in a quietly implemented U turn. US president Biden is left with the unenviable job of solving this huge problem during the pandemic. He has also committed to a somewhat socialistic vision with a $3.5 trillion plan for workers and families, as has vice chancellor Scholz in Germany with his own version of programs, after the failures of unregulated forms of capitalism. Scholz goes so far as to say his mission is to show that there is really no such thing as a self-made man, that it is help from society, his fellow citizens, and government, that makes it possible for him to do his work. In a sense the world is shifting away from Reagan forms of capitalism without regulation after seeing disastrous results during the pandemic. Not just China. Some form of government guidance and regulations are now seen as essential in China, the US, UK, Germany and India for a better society and a better, healthier life, and for opportunity for all in each country.   ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Economists are calling this a "wage-less" recovery in the U.S. With unemployment at 8.8%, wage pressures are weak. Average hourly earnings were flat in March 2011. The annualized growth of average hourly earnings for the last 5 months is 1%, according to Gluskin Sheff chief economist Rosenberg. After accounting for higher inflation, real wages are actually falling.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A slight shift in American opinion favoring a deal with Iran is shown in a WSJ/NBC poll in July 2015 compared to the poll in April 2015. Support for reaching a nuclear deal with Iran remains stable at 36% in both polls, the opposed drops by 6 percentage points to 17% from 23%, and the percentage of people who say they do not know enough to formulate an opinion goes up to 46% from 40%. The intricacies of a nuclear technology deal and the sites involved lead to a high percentage of don't know enough to give an opinion. Factors hindering a deal include inspection of military sites, and Iranian intentions. Factors favoring reaching a deal now is the risk that this would mean Iran would go back into isolation and the opportunity to work with moderates might be lost. The Rouhani administration was an effort by voters to elect a government that could ease or remove sanctions to improve the economy and living conditions- its failure would lead to Iran losing an opportunity to open up to the world. The pressure from the U.S. Congress and Israel served to push for a verifiable and effective agreement to control development of nuclear technology for weapons systems. Behavioural factors involved are the very young population in Iran which has no memories about the period before the revolution in 1979- 70% of the population of 74 million are people under the age of 35. This group is eager for ties to the outside and could change Iran's outlook and policies int the future towards moderation. Risks in not reaching a deal also include the possibility of the Saudis developing nuclear technology and nuclear proliferation. Winners from a deal because of the flow of Iranian oil to world markets and a period of extended low oil prices are the U.S., Europe, China and India. Germany gains new markets to replace the growth in the Russian market after sanctions. Lifting of an arms embargo, an added risk in the last days of the talks, would be mitigated by making the lifting of that embargo very gradual....
The Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The steep decline in popularity of French president Emmanuel Macron in the period of one year. With the yellow vest protests on the economic insecurity of struggling families, Macron's efforts to bring in business friendly policies as a change agent are itself out of step with the times and with France in the provinces and small towns, as pointed out in the New York Times and Times of London analysis of the situation in France today.

As pointed out in the analysis Macron's base itself is small and its anti-institutional posture rejecting conventional politics itself has given momentum to the current yellow vest protests about economic insecurity of struggling families. The support for this comes from all parts of society and single political party, without nationalism, race or migration as factors at all, and comes so soon in one year from the time that Macron emerged with his own movement rejecting the institutional structure.  

Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Margo Oge, headed the Office of Transportation and AIr Quality at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from 1994-2012. Here she points out the contradiction in what automakers supported when the current fuel emission standards were set and today's effort by the Trump administration to loosen the standards. She also points to the contradiction between the trends in Europe, China, India, which are moving towards stricter standards and the U.S. reversing direction.  About one dozen states in addition to California have the power under the Clean Air Act to set their own standards. These states make up about one third of the U.S. market. What would result is a fracturing of the U.S. market. This would create problems for automakers as one expert recently pointed out in the NYT, that automakers should be careful what they wish for.  Automakers such as Ford say they support the current fuel emissions standards, yet call for flexibility. GM's CEO, Mary Barra, says she supports current standards. Toyota also says it supports the current emission standards. And diesel engines are now declining in Europe as a result of fuel emissions standards to preserve good air quality. History has shown the automakers have suffered badly from competition when emissions and fuel efficiency standards were lax. During the last decade the auto industry in Michigan faced decline as a result of poor management decisions and lack of foresight in pushing forward with new technologies in this field. The current recovery in the auto industry is a result of a reversal of the poor decisions made between 2000-2008, including fuel emissions and fuel efficiency, air quality decisions.    ...
The New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Shoichiro Toyoda and Okuda who ran Toyota in the eighties and nineties to make Toyota what it is today, question Toyota's strategy. The precise criticism is outlined in this article at the timwe Tooyota was considering its eigth plant in Tupelo, Mississippi. Their criticism focusses on the complacency to tolerate higher labor costs, to accept less manufacturing efficiency in overseas plants compared to Japan, and put in billions of dollars in new plants which may not be profitable quickly when the same result can be accomplished by adding more assembly lines to existing plants. The Toyota Tundra plant in Texas has overcapacity as the pickup has not sold as expected and this could happen at other plants if Toyota is not careful enough. Also the decisions to build plants in many different states appears to be based not just on manufacturing efficiency but also on desire to win political support in those states- California, Indiana and 6 southern states. Has that gone too far even when it is cheaper to manufacture in Japan because of the weaker yen? If it helps to keep the targets for Toyota vehicle content made in the USA (when imports have increased significantly) cannot this be accomplished by adding more assembly lines to existing plants? These are the points made by Shoichiro and Okuda. Especially that complacency may be getting into decisionmaking at Toyota. Behind all this is the fear that the Big Three may finally be breaking free of the higher unionized wage and benefit costs that put them at a disadvantage. And at the same time the quality gap may be shruinking between Toyota and the US manufacturers. This is evidenced in other articles, one recently on Ford's progress in JD Powers surveys. Here the figure of 2.3 million vehicles recalled in 2005 by Toyota is cited as showing Toyota slipping in the quality it was known for....
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
What Handan Iron and Steel in Hebei Province 300 miles south of Beijing and ThyssenKrupp in Dortmund, Germany, have in common. The transplanting of Germany's aging defunct iron and steel furnaces and plant to Handan, boxed and crated away- its unreal that in 1998 Handan Iron and Steel bought and transferred an aging polluting plant to a city where the steel works are located in China which has 8.5 million residents. When years later the steel works were debated to be moved to a distance away from the city with Baoshan Steel, the decision was made to instead put a new plant there instead. The solution was to make pollution payments to residents of Handan. It was Mao's dream to build a steel industry in Hebei province ,which has large deposits of iron ore and coal and a rail line. Couple of questions come up to mind- one why did the first steel works go up right in Handan, and same is true of Dortmund, labor supply perhaps but couldn't homes be built nearby instead and these plants located away from cities. Second the deal for bringing the ThyssenKrupp plants was as recent as 1998, by this time China was already a big steel producer (producing more than the US by one estimate) and in a few years Chinese steel production was to exceed the US, Europe and Japan combined. With steel production already on the rise why didn't China move more carefully. Some of the Thyssen Krupp assets were built only a few years before 2000 and met stringent environmental control. China bought these.. Why didn't China pick out the best assets instead of old aging blast furnaces. The possible answers are that they were available at cut rate prices, but were they worth it. The second is that Hebei must be competing with other parts of China, and there wasn't a rational allocation of capital as would happen if a sophiticated company like a Mittal or a Tata Steel is involved. Is China operating on a outmoded concept- nationalism, competition between provinces with local government officials running the show? The other question is that in the case of the automobile industry a different pattern is seen, the most modern technology was selected , and in the case of Cherry, the most recent technology was selected for manufacturing cars, then why was this same pattern not adopted in the case of steel. In the end China has a surplus of steel mills, which makes this rush into steel production without carefully thinking through this appear to have been a mistake. The visual picture if one flies into Dortmund of manmade lakes, green park areas and residential housing and shopping from the $22 billion the EU and Germany are investing to turn the Ruhr valley region of Dortmund into a centre of education, technology and tourism now contrasts sharply with Handan in Hebei province. Can emerging countries do better, build manufacturing for jobs but keep living conditions in mind, be patient and work to achieve the best overall results, and build education, technology, appropriate for their own situation. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us